In article ,
Spider wrote:

Only joking David, I find it very strange that the "trade" still call
them Geraniums when they have been Pelagoniums for a very long time,
1932 wasn't it. Yet they changed to from using Datura to Brugmansia
almost instantly as they have other plants that had their names changed.

My understanding was that Brugmansia and Datura were two different
plants (though closely related), where the Brug flowers are pendant and
the Datura flowers are erect. Is this wrong?

I should have to investigate, but the former are usually perennial
and the latter annual, too. However, not long ago, they were ALL
called Datura. Some botanical name changes are justified, but
others are merely done to massage the egos of the bureaucrats that
claim to be scientists.

That's interesting, if true. Since I perceive them as non-hardy plants,
I hadn't troubled to consider if they were perennial or not. I have seen
some very large plants which, had I thought about it, would have to have
been perennial to put on such mature and quite woody growth. Having said
that, I recall that there is woody growth on the bi-annual Echium pininana.

Most Brugmansia are best as plot plants, overwintered under cover.
Some flower the first year, but not reliably in poor summers.

I try and keep up with the botanical names, but it's not easy. It is
clear that many gardeners simply don't want to accept a new name for an
old favourite. The changing of the Chrysanthemum clan names being a
case in point.

It's almost entirely the fault of the taxonomic fanatics. Most of
us are prepared to change, if there is a good reason, but not put
up with their extremism and ego massaging.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.